@MarcelNL: "The processing/perception is quite similar across individuals" Perception is totally different across the board with different individuals.
When it comes to audio perception there is definitely correlation between what’s played and how it’s perceived. A lot of compression codecs wouldn’t work well otherwise, for example.
(...) An interesting experiment is to try to set up a cartridge with a few listeners in the room. With each adjustment one can ask does this sound more or less real. When I have done this, there is generally a consensus and everyone agrees with each other. Individual subjective opinions tend toward the objective when there is broad agreement. (...)
Please forget about the particular session and the friendly people you are thinking about. You just described a typical condition of maximum bias factor in a listening test. A collective panel of friends in the room commenting on the fly on tricky adjustments to reach an unrealistic objective.
Please forget about the particular session and the friendly people you are thinking about. You just described a typical condition of maximum bias factor in a listening test. A collective panel of friends in the room commenting on the fly on tricky adjustments to reach an unrealistic objective.
Are you saying when a guy sets up a cartridge and two friends are in the room and one of them owns the system and they all happen to agree on whether the sound gets better or worse with a particular change in vertical tracking force or vertical tracking angle, that that information should be disregarded (forget) because you are friendly with the people in the room? Is that really what you’re saying? You’re saying listening impressions among friends are not valid information?
I have little experience with analog, yet the few times I saw and heard someone make adjustments to accomodate a new cartridge the effects were crystal clear, so clear that I dare say bias is not a major risk there. First time was a friend demonstrating the various adjustments I had to make on my project L75, the last time it was Hyun Lee demo-ing his latest work.
Are you saying when a guy sets up a cartridge and two friends are in the room and one of them owns the system and they all happen to agree on whether the sound gets better or worse with a particular change in vertical tracking force or vertical tracking angle, that that information should be disregarded (forget) because you are friendly with the people in the room? Is that really what you’re saying? You’re saying listening impressions among friends are not valid information?
He was referring to listening together. If we listen together and agree on a sonic attribute (s), it us just us biasing each other. So in his opinion all such should be dismissed.
That’d be tantamount to having shared understanding… and might even bring about an end to a good deal of pointless circular debate… what next… some kind of general agreement???
If the guy setting up the cartridge hears an improvement, it makes no difference to set up if the others agree. The cartridge still needs to be set up. It gets interesting if they disagree on the direction, but he did not mention that possibility.
Are you saying when a guy sets up a cartridge and two friends are in the room and one of them owns the system and they all happen to agree on whether the sound gets better or worse with a particular change in vertical tracking force or vertical tracking angle, that that information should be disregarded (forget) because you are friendly with the people in the room? Is that really what you’re saying? You’re saying listening impressions among friends are not valid information?
Again Peter, you should read what you wrote before asking questions.
I just said what I wrote, you can conclude anything you want to imagine. You stated (I quoted it in my post) : "Individual subjective opinions tend toward the objective when there is broad agreement. "
I say that in the biased conditions you refer these are not considered valid "individual subjective opinions" and, BTW, in order to become a valid objective data a lot more than three data opinions are needed.
As usual, you misrepresent my many posts on the subject as you lack knowledge on the subject or read them too fast.
I just said that in some conditions group consensus are not individual data points.
If interested on the subject of group listening, please open a new thread on it with YOUR opinions on the subject and I will be very happy to add mine and debate - always happy to agree or disagree in a civilized way.
If the guy setting up the cartridge hears an improvement, it makes no difference to set up if the others agree. The cartridge still needs to be set up. It gets interesting if they disagree on the direction, but he did not mention that possibility.
i think cartridge adjustment is one "group" listening endeavor where group perception has advantages. particularly when that group has practice doing it together, common references, and common terms used.
i maybe participated in 15-20 such sessions with Joel Durand, jazdoc, Scott Sheaffer, and myself back 7-12 years ago when Joel was first developing his arms. after a few sessions together 'we' got pretty darn good at it. i would admit to be easily the lightweight in that formidable group. learned a bunch. maybe as enjoyable group of sessions as i've ever been a part of.
did we lean toward a particular sound? who can argue not? but lots of live music listening by this group too.
He was referring to listening together. If we listen together and agree on a sonic attribute (s), it us just us biasing each other. So in his opinion all such should be dismissed.
Again Peter, you should read what you wrote before asking questions.
I just said what I wrote, you can conclude anything you want to imagine. You stated (I quoted it in my post) : "Individual subjective opinions tend toward the objective when there is broad agreement. "
I say that in the biased conditions you refer these are not considered valid "individual subjective opinions" and, BTW, in order to become a valid objective data a lot more than three data opinions are needed.
Francisco, this recent example has nothing to do with my previous comment which is going from the subjective to the objective based on a large sample size. That is a different subject. I am surprised that you wrote I should forget any opinion of a friend in a room who agrees as being valid because it is highly biased. That is a conclusion that I flatly reject.
@MarcelNL: "The processing/perception is quite similar across individuals" Perception is totally different across the board with different individuals.
Perception is individual however we are the product of long evolution. I'll suggest we hear more similarly than different.
Put on a classical symphony and ask people to point to where they hear the stand-up basses or the bells. I doubt you will get 'totally different' answers, maybe not identical, but how many people point at the ceiling? Most people can tell the difference between a clarinet and a timpani. Of course there will be outliers.
I suspect what we might call a difference in perception is equally likely to be a difference in vocabulary choice and ability to describe what is heard. If you find totally different descriptions, ask what are the antonyms of the descriptive words - sometimes it helps.
amp.theguardian.com
